Should we end the drug war in NZ?

[candor]

The state of the law seems to be academic. Drug problem in countries waging full on war on drugs. Drug problem of equal size also in countries like ours with official harm minimisation policiies.

Comparing NZ to the States is invalid. Their Ministry of health would not put out how to do it safely guides entitled variously
"P - its your choice"
"cannabis - its your choice"
"heroin - its your choice" .... but ours would and does - seeming to have little awareness of the law of the land. What next "rape - it's your choice

My cousin here with dreads has never been hassled. When he moved to the States he was told by many concerned people he had to change his look... or there would be heat. NZ is liberal, with an official policy not to prosecute for small amounts of dope. IMO legalisers (especially angry young university men) need to do some volunteer service abroad to get some perspective on what social issues actually are big deals.

[Toaster]

"Regulated like alcohol"

Oh how my sides hurt when I read that...regulated like alcohol - oh that's working SO well eh!!

THE worst drug we have.....

I wonder if the 'other' drugs were legalised and 'regulated' if we would have the same chaos??.

Agreed and well said, if some of these critics got off their armchairs and came out with the cops on the wee hours of the drinking nights, they'd realise just how much crime e.g. disorder, assaults, robberies and domestic violence are as a direct result of the "regulated" drug called alcohol. It's a huge cost to the taxpayer through time in the courts, police time, hospitals, ACC and insurance claims (which pushes up everyones premiums) etc etc.

I am sure everyone can name many a time they have done really stupid things when they had a few drinks too many. I sure have!

[davereid]

As long as there is a demand, there will be supply.

And the tighter the restrictions, the more profit to be made by the suppliers, so the inevitable will (has ?) occured.

We are sensibly ignoring the question as to "WHY there is a demand" - ie why do some humans need to be stoned to enjoy life.

The next question has to be "How can we minimise risk to the non drug taking section of the community"

The last question to ask is "how do we reduce risk to the drug user"

Reducing the risk to the non drug taking section of the community has been attempted by prohibition.

Predictably it has backfired.

"P" exists as a direct result of prohibition. Its a nasty drug, both for the user, and the community its made in.

The reason its made, is simple. Its very easy to make.

The process is childs play. Obtain ephedrine or a close relative. Mix with phosphorus, or phosphoric acid or even match heads, and iodine. Heat, dry, go and kill people.

You will also make hydroiodic acid, phosphine gas and an explosive called diphosphine.

The point is, if safer drugs that gave the same buzz were legally available there would be NO DEMAND for the real nasty ones.

I don't care if you want to drink/smoke/snort your way to heaven.
I do care when you exhibit your addiction in front of my grandkids.
I really care when you commits crimes to afford your habit.
I really care when criminal gangs get rich because of your habit.

IMHO the solution to at least the last two is legal access to less dangerous drugs.

[scumdog]

The point is, if safer drugs that gave the same buzz were legally available there would be NO DEMAND for the real nasty ones.

Rubbish.

People will always want to 'explore' and young people revel in doing stuff that is 'dangerous' and illegal.

So if you could find a 'safer' drug that gave the same buzz (as 'P'?) legally you would have even more people using that drug than would normally take any drug.

And you would still end up with a fair proportion using 'P' because of the perceived 'coolness' of it for the reasons I mentioned in my first paragraph.

After all, when Party Pills were legal there were shitloads of kids taking them - but there were also the hardcore ones still using Ritalin, 'P' and whatever else they could get their hands on - and some were shooting up with the 'safe' BZP too.

[alanzs]

Just tick the leaf!

[carver]

we should toatally end it.

its your body, its your life

[alanzs]

Mexico and Argentian recently legalized possession of very small amounts of ALL drugs. The Argentina supreme court said that to deny a person the right to use substances they chose to use is a violation of their rights, as a human being. Good on them! Maybe this will be the beginning of the end of the US led, never ending war on drugs. Personal freedom is the issue...

[paddy]

Wow, that was a thread dredge. But seeing as the thread is dredged - why is everything a "War" nowadays. Except for the things that could rightly be called a "War" which now seem to be called "Conflicts". Somebody answer me that. :-)

[Laxi]

Wow, that was a thread dredge. But seeing as the thread is dredged - why is everything a "War" nowadays. Except for the things that could rightly be called a "War" which now seem to be called "Conflicts". Somebody answer me that. :-)

would you prefer we go back to "police actions"?

[paddy]

would you prefer we go back to "police actions"?

LoL. I don't think we need "Proper Nouns" for everything. Lets use verbs: policing. Or, the police are focusing on drugs. Or we've formed a department to specialise in drug interdiction. Anyway, this is a "War On Semantics" that I will never win so I should just quit while I'm behind. :-)

[Indiana_Jones]

Triumphs rock.

-Indy

[Laxi]

Triumphs rock.

-Indy

random

[Tone165]

As long as there is a demand, there will be supply.

And the tighter the restrictions, the more profit to be made by the suppliers, so the inevitable will (has ?) occured.

We are sensibly ignoring the question as to "WHY there is a demand" - ie why do some humans need to be stoned to enjoy life.

The next question has to be "How can we minimise risk to the non drug taking section of the community"

The last question to ask is "how do we reduce risk to the drug user"

Reducing the risk to the non drug taking section of the community has been attempted by prohibition.

Predictably it has backfired.

"P" exists as a direct result of prohibition. Its a nasty drug, both for the user, and the community its made in.

The reason its made, is simple. Its very easy to make.

The process is childs play. Obtain ephedrine or a close relative. Mix with phosphorus, or phosphoric acid or even match heads, and iodine. Heat, dry, go and kill people.

You will also make hydroiodic acid, phosphine gas and an explosive called diphosphine.

The point is, if safer drugs that gave the same buzz were legally available there would be NO DEMAND for the real nasty ones.

I don't care if you want to drink/smoke/snort your way to heaven.
I do care when you exhibit your addiction in front of my grandkids.
I really care when you commits crimes to afford your habit.
I really care when criminal gangs get rich because of your habit.

IMHO the solution to at least the last two is legal access to less dangerous drugs.

Couldn't have put it better!

If half the money wasted by authorities making drug trade more profitable was spent on education and treatment.........there might not be such a problem!

[SPman]

. Why would anyone want to deny someone who is dying relief, no matter what chemical form it takes? Compassion is what it's about.

I had a friend whose father was dying of cancer (many years ago) and the doctor wouldn't even prescribe morphine for the pain! He might become an addict, he says!!!! Callous prick! The poor sod died of a heart attack from the immense pain he was suffering! May the Dr writhe in hell for eternity!
Governments and most authorities will mouth off about compassion but only apply it, if votes or positive approval ratings are involved! Otherwise, they couldn't give a shit about you, me, morality, compassion, truth, getting along together or most any sensible rules of living!
Generally, they are self centred, egotistical, common sensically bereft, shit heads!
eg, Singapore & Malaysia, where they execute small time drug pushers, but the big boys involved in the real money have government connections and get away scot free! - ie seem to be "tough on drugs" by picking on small time, easy targets,whilst those who do the real damage and make the big money carry on , untouched!
Compassion? From Governments? Fat fucking chance!

[Pixie]

Its a little hard to believe 42% of our total population, are regular smokers!! That's just under 1/2 the population (men, women and children), "ye right"! I can accept 42% have used at one time or the other!!

But that said? Make it legal, produce what we need, tax the shit out of it, and lessen the tax on petrol!!!

I can.It explains why Kiwis are a bunch of hippy fuckwits